On 21/01/16 10:19 -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
On Jan 21, 2016, at 10:15 AM, Torvald Riegel <trie...@redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 10:06 -0800, Mike Stump wrote:
On Jan 21, 2016, at 9:29 AM, Dominique d'Humières <domi...@lps.ens.fr> wrote:
// { dg-do run { target { ! { *-*-darwin* powerpc-ibm-aix* } } } }
A comment to hint that this has something to do with weak undefined would be
nice.
Here's the patch I prepared (which indeed includes a comment).
OK for trunk? I'm not quite sure whether this qualifies as a
regression, but having an additional test that now fails is one I guess.
<libitm-safeexc-unsupported.patch>
A simple testsuite fixup like this is still ok. From a darwin, AIX perspective
it is fine. If either the transaction or the libstdc++ people like it, I think
we’re set.
OK from the libstdc++ side.
